Teleconverters: maybe not as bad as I thought? I've always been under the impression that teleconverters reduce image quality. My first teleconverter was a 4-element Vivitar, which I...

brontodon

I've always been under the impression that teleconverters reduce image quality. My first teleconverter was a 4-element Vivitar, which I used with my Canon FD lenses, and it really did reduce image quality, especially if shot with the lens wide open. Many years later, I tried a Kenko Pro teleconverter with 7 optical elements. It was much better than the Vivitar, but I would still get a lot of chromatic aberration when I used it my 300mm f/4 Nikkor (having switched to Nikon at some point.) That experience led me to put away the TC and pretty much forget that I owned it.

Recently I have been doing a lot of bird photography, which generally requires long telephoto lenses -- the longer, the better. I started using a 200-500mm Nikon zoom, which is a fine lens, but even 500mm is too short for a lot of bird photography. The 200-500 has a couple of features -- vibration reduction and electronic diaphragm control -- that didn't exist back when by teleconverter was made. I started wondering whether the lens would work with the TC, and to my surprise, it did!

The 200-500mm Nikkor has 19 lens elements, and I felt that adding 7 more would not be conducive to high image quality, but to my surprise, image degradation has been less noticeable than I expected. I have only been using the combination for a few days, but I have been pleasantly surprised by the results I'm getting. The 200-500 isn't the best-handling lens -- it's heavy and bulky -- but the TC adds less than an inch of length and only 5 or 6 ounces of weight. It makes the lens into a 280-700mm zoom with a constant aperture of f/8, and the 700mm focal length is letting me get shots that just wouldn't work at 500mm. I'm also not having any trouble with focus speed or accuracy at f/8, even using the off-center AF points of my Nikon D7100.

I never thought I'd be using a teleconverter with a long zoom lens (particularly such an old teleconverter!), but my results have been surprisingly good, and having 700mm at my disposal surely helps!

(Download)

Toment Loc: FL, IL

Tiny bit of CA in catch light on second photo but definitely a keeper
Nice...
Thanks

imagemeister Loc: mid east Florida

The Kenko pro 1.4X is a 5 element formula. Using it, and, to be optimized, you will need more ISO, more stabilization, and more shutter speed. ......Oh, and your AF will be more challenged ....

brontodon

Toment wrote:

Tiny bit of CA in catch light on second photo but definitely a keeper
Nice...
Thanks

Sure, not optical perfection, but as I said, better than expected! Also, the background is a bit busy in the photo of the mallard (which was shot at f/11, and the bird was fairly close to the trees behind it), but look at the background of the blackbird shot!

tdozier3 Loc: Northern Illinois

Very nice shot of the female Red Wing

Howard5252 Loc: New York / Florida (now)

Wait until you start noticing that there are birds just a little beyond the range of your current lens/TC combo ... Nikon does make make an 800mm lens with a built in 1.25 TC and at a mere $16,000 (used, maybe $13,000).
The birds know!

kpmac Loc: Ragley, La

Looks like that combo is quite usable.

brontodon

Howard5252 wrote:

Wait until you start noticing that there are birds just a little beyond the range of your current lens/TC combo ... Nikon does make make an 800mm lens with a built in 1.25 TC and at a mere $16,000 (used, maybe $13,000).
The birds know!

Oh, I'm quite aware there are birds still out of range! I'm just going to concentrate on getting the best photos I can with the equipment I have. The thing that got me excited was that I could use my existing teleconverter with my new lens and still get decent photos!

brontodon

tdozier3 wrote:

Very nice shot of the female Red Wing

Thanks so much! It was taken in a local wildlife preserve, in an area where I hadn't previously been able to get decent photos. The extra 200mm makes the difference!

brontodon

imagemeister wrote:

The Kenko pro 1.4X is a 5 element formula. Using it, and, to be optimized, you will need more ISO, more stabilization, and more shutter speed. ......Oh, and your AF will be more challenged ....

You may be right about the number of elements. I see that the recent and current Kenko Pros are 5-element designs. Mine is much older and I thought it was 7. In any case, I found that the image stabilization and the autofocus worked quite well and I was not disappointed -- that was my surprise!

PixelStan77 Loc: Vermont/Chicago

brontodon wrote:

I've always been under the impression that teleconverters reduce image quality. My first teleconverter was a 4-element Vivitar, which I used with my Canon FD lenses, and it really did reduce image quality, especially if shot with the lens wide open. Many years later, I tried a Kenko Pro teleconverter with 7 optical elements. It was much better than the Vivitar, but I would still get a lot of chromatic aberration when I used it my 300mm f/4 Nikkor (having switched to Nikon at some point.) That experience led me to put away the TC and pretty much forget that I owned it.

Recently I have been doing a lot of bird photography, which generally requires long telephoto lenses -- the longer, the better. I started using a 200-500mm Nikon zoom, which is a fine lens, but even 500mm is too short for a lot of bird photography. The 200-500 has a couple of features -- vibration reduction and electronic diaphragm control -- that didn't exist back when by teleconverter was made. I started wondering whether the lens would work with the TC, and to my surprise, it did!

The 200-500mm Nikkor has 19 lens elements, and I felt that adding 7 more would not be conducive to high image quality, but to my surprise, image degradation has been less noticeable than I expected. I have only been using the combination for a few days, but I have been pleasantly surprised by the results I'm getting. The 200-500 isn't the best-handling lens -- it's heavy and bulky -- but the TC adds less than an inch of length and only 5 or 6 ounces of weight. It makes the lens into a 280-700mm zoom with a constant aperture of f/8, and the 700mm focal length is letting me get shots that just wouldn't work at 500mm. I'm also not having any trouble with focus speed or accuracy at f/8, even using the off-center AF points of my Nikon D7100.

I never thought I'd be using a teleconverter with a long zoom lens (particularly such an old teleconverter!), but my results have been surprisingly good, and having 700mm at my disposal surely helps!

I've always been under the impression that telecon... (show quote)

Glad that it is working for you.

Toment Loc: FL, IL

You bet. Fabulous!

Nalu Loc: Southern Arizona

At least with my Sony gear, I find that I am completely satisfied with the image quality when using either 1.4 or 2X converters with my long lenses. With my Canon gear, 1.4 was fine, but the 2X just didn't cut it. Now, I have no hesitancy on putting on a 2X even though I need a bit more ISO (I typically fix my speed and aperture and adjust exposure with ISO). Any additional noise resulting from higher ISO's can usually be fixed with Topaz DeNoise. It is an absolutely an amazing program. At least with the newer equipment, perhaps converters are getting a bad wrap.

jerryc41 Loc: Catskill Mts of NY

Yes - especially compared with the price of a long lens. I use my Kenko 1.4TC occasionally, and I'm satisfied with the results.

Peteso Loc: Blacks Hills

The Olympus 1.4x & 2.0x teleconverters produce excellent results with compatible Olympus Pro lenses. I am surprised that micro 4/3rds doesn’t receive more attention by wildlife Hoggers. Mft weight and cost advantages are considerable.